jus call uz skinz. i really cant believe the botches here arguing out their personalities are the same ones as on the only other piece i read. fruk, you blabberheads are crowding in on every posting! CD regulars...you know who you are...pllllllease get a life and give some breathing room to this site...you are stiffling it with ego-spam.

my thoughts: its obvious russell and company, who are not spring-chickens, wanna ride out as warriors... they like it. they know it. they miss it. warriors, even spiritual warriors, live for the fight. thats the other side of skin-spirituality. thats the other side of balance. russel's fight is toward a purpose, as were sioux warrior's before his. its all for love. but that doesnt mean there isnt a fight. my guess, these skins will push an escalating (media) fight going for high drama and the media/legal payback... and yup yup, these boys be warriors for reals. they dont have full backing, so it will split the native-community. but it needs to happen; if its a spiritual world, sometimes thats how spiritual balance really works when things are out of balance. hoka hey russell. p-sout

I am a citizen of the state of North Dakota. I am not Native American, but I sure wish that this would include the entire state of North Dakota. It would serve them right. Most people out here are die-hard, George Bush loving Republicans. They don't even pay any attention to what's really going on in the world. And, they don't care. All a bunch of sheep. Well, I'm not one of the sheep. Maybe this will wake them up. I would gladly become a member of the new Lakota Nation. Lucy Gould,
Alfred, N.D. petsr4ever@hotmail.com

There is a Supreme Court ruling on the Treaty of 1865 that involves the illegal taking of 7.5 million acres that has never been settled. The U.S. government does not account for Indian revenues held in trust or honor thier treaties. That is the problem. It would be like rounding up the people in those states and moving them to nevada or somewhere and keeping thier money because they couldn't manage it knowing they brought illegally obtained land and killed the lawfull owners.

I'm curious, why have the citizens of 5 north central states been invited to join the Lakota people? Is this how much land Russell Means et al feel their ancestors owned or were occupying before the first U.S./Lakota treaty was signed?

I Love and respect them. Our adopted son is half Indian.

A PHD does not insure one earns a sense of humor. You either have one or you don't. I still do not know what set you off. You are best at assuming.

Indians are a funny and a sacred people. They make good medicine men and good stand up comedians. I know, I am one of them.

Gringo is a generic word used here in Latin America to identify folks from the US.

If you choose to believe that its use is depreciative, I suggest you examine your own conscience, as your behavior has been shameful on this thread.

Your apology was not an apology at all--just a justification of your obnoxious imperialist behavior.

And my PhD in English obtained from University of Massachusetts in 1972 does not obligate me to find your comments humorous, nor to accept your left-handed "apology". You are a very hostile person, as well as disrespectful.

As a Native American, I believe I can safely say that we do not want YOUR SYMPATHY. And as for me, I will be happy to let you keep your hypocritical shame, too.

Furthermore, I never tossed any slings at the Indians in the first place. I respect them and I have a high degree of empathy for them and am ashamed of what the GRINGOs did to them. And I said so, __ more than once.

I do not respect every single Indian I have ever met and I do not respect you MOONRAVEN. Therefore, we'll do as you have so wished and continue to dislike one another and that's fine with me. Thankfully we don't ever have to meet in person. I'll move on, and delighted to do so, you can stay in your selected pool of crap and be forever angry at the GRINGOS'.

MOONRAVEN, You like that term GRINGO don't you. You are offended when some white guy uses satire, but it's alright for you to use an insulting term for all whites, that is not satire at all. You are a a rather strange person to be a college graduate and not have a sense of humor, or accept any form of an apology, even for an offense which was not meant to offend your scale of ethics. Don't try to be so noble, you don't have the qualifications.

ike,

This IS an important issue. And as a Native American woman (Mohawk Nation) I am particularly sensitive to the slings and arrows of gringo discursive style--especially that which passes for "humor".

I don't find it all at funny. Anymore than I find folks who make jokes about the 90 million to 100 million indigenous people who were slaughtered by white invaders to be funny guys.

Perhaps that's why I haven't lived in Gringolandia for 15 years.

How unfortunate that the level of this dialogue about such important issues is so low. I think it is better to keep one's own thoughts and not share them with people who have nothing but low level comments about personality.

The USA is in trouble because there are no longer people who can think and create ideas for others to consider. Half the country does not vote and is not capable of choosing anything other than their sefishness. Another part of the USA thinks the American Ideal is worth exporting by force. And if exported and not accepted than annexation without compensation or discussion, as was done to the native peoples, is the way.

Never mind all that, of course we know that history is unimportant to creative thought! Or is it? The models of the Greco/Roman history of its expansion are unimportant, why should there be anything to study in the ways that people have laid waste the Earth or destroyed other cultures for their own ends based in greed, right? Do we not think, given the fact that the globe is disintegrating with climate change, that a new form of resolving differences is in order? Do we not think that a new form of economic justice is in order? There are people writing here that are concerned, if not they would not spend the time to write, well, perhaps they have nothing better to do! Why not put those energies into political action and become involved? Are you all prefessional gripers?

Rather than reducing yourselves to carping about one anothers personality, perhaps it would be wiser to think about what the native people writing here are saying. Perhaps it would be wise to rethink American cultural thinking of every kind that is based in any kind of dogma? Perhaps it is time to rethink what being human is really about and our association with the natural world? Perhaps a new form of dialogue about compensation for previous mistakes a goverment makes is necessary?

If we don't, we all lose life for all for all time. . .that is the final question and it requires cogent and direct action and thought, not petty thinking which turns the level of this discussion into the lowest level dogma on display. No one cares hearing this kind of carping. I must not write here any longer if I can avoid looking at what I know is the usual American character. If this is what democracy and free speech are about, I am thinking that we are done. . .but I knew that!

Just some thinking about the clap-trap insults and yahoo mentality I find here. It is also reflected in the Congress of America, and why this country has helped greatly to ruin the world. One can see it on C Span.

YOU move on.

I wrote my Master's thesis on Dryden.

He was a wit.

Yours is dim.

And methinks you protest too much....

Sarcasm or satire should be accepted and not taken as being mean or insensitive. Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, John Kennedy, etc, all used sarcasm to effect.

"Satire has always shone among the best, and is the boldest way, if not the best,__ to tell men freely of their foulest thoughts.__To laugh at their vain deeds and vainer thoughts."

~~Dryden~~ Essay upon satire.

I meant no offense to anyone with my prior posts, before you wrote about me MOOONRAVEN. Let us just say it never happened and move on.

So much for a peace treaty. Maybe MOONRAVEN is smoking the wrong type of tobacco.

Hey Moonraven, if you don't wish to be insulted, don't insult first.

I never have 'never' said or written anything at CD or anyplace else, that would prove to anyone I was a Bush type. I'm far from a perfect human being, __ but a Bushie? What on Earth got you onto my case in the first place? ___ Actually, __ I don't care, forget it.

Okay will do.

Mean Gringo out.

That's perhaps because Means is not a Little Eichmann?

Unlike some OTHER Indian leaders, Russell Means stood up courageously beside Ward Churchill a few years back when the entire U.S. establishment was calling for Churchill's head to be delivered to them in a box.

KemPatrick:

Your "screw you" invective revealed you for EXACTLY the obnoxious mean gringo I accused you of being.

Hoist on your own petard, kimosabe.

...another nation for Darth Cheney to invade...

"Let's all be friends again. sometimes I get shitty and think I'm funny at times. I'm sorry for any hurt feelings I may have caused."

mealsotoo...[well said, btw]

Kem

You are funny at times and we can all use a little humor. We live in a troubled country in troubled times so it is good we care about this as well.

May the spirit of the holiday be with you.

Let's all be friends again. sometimes I get shitty and think I'm funny at times. I'm sorry for any hurt feelings I may have caused.

Grandma

When I spoke of the Iroquoise nation I was using the model that helped shape this nation many years ago. I cannot comment on this women you speak of but she is part of a larger society that should help her.

Kem

I don't think you understand things from a native perspective and that is why some people notice cultural differences in your comments. It is kidding for you but not for people that face hardships. It is quite ironic that white people are upset with indians for how they use thier land.

I think these are all very good comments, it is time we stop shooting the messenger.

Doom n Gloom December 23rd, 2007 12:16 pm:

I have posted nothing "anti-Indian" here nor elsewhere. The comment quoted speaks about "Tribalism", which is neither unique nor inherent to Indians. Do you know the joke told in many tribes about "Crabs in a Bucket"?

If you believe that Indians must remain tribal, then it is you who are anti-Indian, and not me.

"Now your battles with the imperialists are in the courts. This time you'll be armed with legal knowledge."

Such "knowledge" didn't help the Cherokee very-much (directly before the Trail of Tears). It was a Cherokee-lawyer who Won their Rights...arguing in the Supreme Court, no-less. Jackson's response to that (and before his crime against the People who had loyally served under him against both the British and other/less-'assimulated' Tribes was something like: "Oh? And how many divisions does the S.C. have at their disposal to enforce their Decision?"
I wish the Lakota (or, however small a portion of them actually pressing these-issues/Actions) much better-Luck, today.

from what I read from the press release this sounds very promising for all concerned.

Good luck and 'Ya ah teh'from the land of the Dineh.

just a note - But happy holidays to all, whatever your holiday of choice -

Grandma
........

And what YOU SEE there about me came from exactly what? And I always appreciated your comments prior to now.

Thank you so much MOONRAVEN for not understanding humor or jest. I wrote some serious posts here in full support of the American Indians and of how horribly my ancestors treated them and how we should attempt to correct our prior wrongs. Never would any sane or sensible person consider I was a Bush type. ___ Screw you.

HOKA HEY! HOKA FKN HEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Russell..."Means Freedom." He may be the extreme native, but we need him to do the bold thing!

Happy New Year and good luck to the tall, handsome, and brave Lakota warriors. Now your battles with the imperialists are in the courts. This time you'll be armed with legal knowledge. :)

KEM PATRICK:

I see you are advocating abrogating the sovereignty of other nations and taking them over.

You and George W. Bush.

Quite a pair.

Geeze WINDJAMMER can't you detect when someone is joking, I wasn't serious about Canada or invading Mexico, try to lighten up. I wasn't ever joking about the methane gas in the Arctic and if you don't think that's our most serious problem, I suggest you read up on it and don't worry about what happened in 1812, worry about what might happen in 2012.

You know, why don't those Lakota just change on a dime and go back to their tribal ways today? Why don't all indigenous peoples around the world smarten up and do what they had done for eons before modern culture overtook them? Why do they continue to live in our culture and wish for their own culture? Why can't they just change now?

Uh huh...right...like we could do it if we wanted to.

Let's not make the perfect be the enemy of the good, folks. How's about we stop excoriating others who are taking steps in their own directions until we've done so ourselves. Of course, if we were truly taking steps ourselves to break from this toxic culture, we wouldn't feel the need to point fingers at others.

Long live hypocrisy!

I just wrote a letter to the editor of my small town newspaper because I was so sick of hearing about immigrants, blah, blah, blah. I reminded them of how the first immigrants to Turtle Island (had they bothered to learn any of the 500 languages, they would have known our country already had a name) behaved and that the first to set foot here were not the Puritans on the Mayflower. Whole tribes were wiped out by smallpox from the Spanish, other Europeans, the Dutch, et al by the time the Mayflower ever arrived. At any rate none of those immigrants felt the need to "learn the language, customs, dress, ceremony, regalia or to learn the indigenous spirituality. Indeed, they immediately began a course of squashing all that "paganism" in the name of their God, ergo, Kill the Indian, Save the Man.

I have been taught that whenever the people need in a leader with certain qualities at a certain time, that person will rise up. He will not be elected. He will not be chosen. He will rise up and he will be recognized as the leader. I have been asking my friends why other countries have coups and juntas and revolutions and storming of the Bastille, etc. Why not us, and not just Indians, but about all of thousands of injustices that have been thrust upon many and...I see that a warrior has indeed risen up at a time when we need a warrior, not a politician, not a lawyer, not a scholar, but a warrior. Pilamaya, Wankan Tanka (Thank God!!!!) Mitakuye Oyasin (We are ALL related). Yazzie, proud Cheyenne/Arapaho

Simpaal Grelmalvas Relkaand.

Thanks for that post grandma. I was looking for someone to post something like that. I started out with a bunch of questions, but I felt I had to respond to some of the rhetoric too.

What is this going to mean? How will this work? Is this more than just fist-pounding?

I'll have to check out Churchill's book btw.

Let's hope the right-wing Dogs-of-War don't repeat what they did in Central America with the support of the right-wing "hero" (hehe) Ronald Reagan. Genocide was committed on the Mayan Indians in Guatamala and elsewhere in Central America.

"But the story of the Reagan-supported genocide of the Mayan Indians was quickly forgotten, as Republicans and the Washington press corps wrapped Reagan's legacy in a fuzzy blanket of heroic mythology.

The atrocities inflicted on the Mayas – and the peasants of El Salvador and Nicaragua – were rarely associated with the popular Reagan. Neither, of course, will anyone in polite Washington society link Reagan to the revelation that the skulls of children butchered at El Mozote became candle holders and good luck charms. ----- Robert Parry
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/012907.html

If they have a casino, the Mafia controls the money.

Did I ask about a map?

Yesterday I asked a very simple question and so far no one has answered it, despite all the rambling history/philosophy lessons. The question is:

Do the Lakota Sioux have a casino? Yes or no?

My guess is that that's what they're really after. We'll see them giving a little to get a lot. FYI, all Indian tribes already have sovereign nation status in the US, which includes self-government and freedom from federal, state, and local taxes. So if they have a corrupt tribal government, it's their own doing. An expert on Indian law once told me that he could count only 5 or 6 tribes that had anything like what we would call a democratic tribal government. I myself know of only one, and they are a tribe that shares their casino profits fairly among the tribal members. This is rare.

Treefrog - you mentioned the "Grandmother's Lodge" as an integral part of Iroquois tribal government. Well it used to be, but a year or so ago the head of a tribe I know of threw his own aunt out of the council meeting and the Women's Lodge (and she was the same person who had recommended him for his own tribal position in the first place). She and her daughter continued to be uppity women and got thrown off the res and were finally kicked into a ditch by another tribal council member (male). Now that's reverence for you!

KEM Patrick - I agree that all Native-American people should be treated like any other American citizen - and in fact, they ARE American citizens already as well as tribal members. You ask what the map would look like - see Ward Churchill's book, "Struggle for the Land"- there's a map (I think p. 123). His idea is that many of the states (13 I think but not sure) west of the Mississippi be made "Indian States" and the eastern ones be non-Indian states. He has detailed plans for moving all the people into the right sections. Something to look forward to, no?

BTW - AS I understand it, the Iroquois Confederacy was formed to stop the killing between the tribes and consisted mainly of an agreement that each tribe would send a representative and each could safely express their opinion. It was never written down by all the Iroquois themselves, but instead memorized by the Onondagas (the "Firekeepers of the Iroquois"), who still have a strong oral tradition.

Could we have a few more facts and less hot air on this thread?

And I repeat the question - do the Lakota Sioux have a casino?

Guess I'll have to go to the BIA site (although it's usually down) and find out for myself.

I appreciate Doom n Gloom's comments regarding the Oglala's hesitence to support such a seemingly radical step. I also recognize Mr. Mean's celebrity actions and the possibility that this move will backfire.

But... Then again. sometimes radical acts are required to bring focus to issues that seem to have been lost in the media attention to important items such as whether the younger Ms. Spears actually had sex to reach her current state of pregnancy or could this be the Christmas miracle of virgin birth making a second coming?

I can't deny the statement of secession makes me smile. I advocate working together in our communities to make the present government in Washington illegitimate and obsolete in what amounts to individual statements of secession.

I also think the statement is very timely considering the U.S. support for an independent Kosovo. We should all be holding the U.S. government up to the light regarding its international rhetoric vs. actions and its hypocrisy regarding its policies toward homegrown activism.

The best way to conquer the failed and rogue U.S. empire is to take action on all fronts to put pressure on the leaders and rally the opposition. This statement of secession is another grain of sand in the bucket that is quickly bringing about the much needed tipping point of empire.

The danger is a possible lack of vision for the future and some leadership and infrastructure to pave the way for a peaceful transition from empire to cooperative social democracy based on community control, sharing, compassion and respect that will allow us all to meet the needs of people within our personal sphere as well as contributing to a working sustainable global community.

We all need to be involved with our neighbors, respect their wisdom or lack of it and meet our problems with a focused vision for the future in mind rather than the short term removal of a problem with actions that may only develop into more problems in the long run.

"It seems pretty black and white to say that Christianity either is a religion of peace or it isn't. I feel that a thoughtful person should recognize that religion isn't simply "bad" or "good." Christianity is a mixture of both, like any other organization."

Don't bother explaining. Too many people here don't get that and define themselves by who and what they are against. Not what the best solutions are to solve problems. It's all about who you hate and who you want to stick it to anymore. Gotta keep dredging up everyone's sordid history. Gotta prove who's rotten and who isn't.

They hate Christianity like Right-Wingers hate Islam. It's all stupid, but I suppose I am also for posting here and trying to be sensible. I don't hate or see myself to superior to anyone based on their color or religion. I only hate certain individuals who are making it bad for everyone whether or not you're Lakota, Irish, Nigerian, Polish, Cuban, or Vietnamese.

godlessrant wrote on December 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pm:

"thanks cmichaelg49 for that great post. i've been saying the same thing for a while…xianity is not a religion of peace, it has a bad history."

It seems pretty black and white to say that Christianity either is a religion of peace or it isn't. I feel that a thoughtful person should recognize that religion isn't simply "bad" or "good." Christianity is a mixture of both, like any other organization.

Noam Chomsky said something to Alan Jones back in 1990 that I've always held up as a very sensible, mature approach to religion:

"It basically doesn't come up. I mean, they know where I stand, I know where they stand. You could ask the question: How important is it to fight this battle, how important to try to convince people they shouldn't have irrational beliefs? I think it's reasonably important, and I do it when the thing comes up. But it's marginal to these pursuits. I don't let it get in the way.

"While I think in principle people should not have irrational beliefs, I should say that as a matter of fact, it is people who hold what I regard as completely irrational beliefs who are among the most effective moral actors in the world, in many respects. They're among the worst, but also among the best, even though the moral beliefs are ostensibly the same. Take, say, the solidarity movement in Central America, which I think is what you probably had in mind. To a large extent, it comes out of mainstream Christianity, based on beliefs that have had outrageous human consequences in the past, and that I think are totally indefensible. In this case, they happen to lead to some of the most courageous, heroic, and honourable human action that's taking place anywhere in the world. Well, that's how life is, I guess. It doesn't come in neat little packages."

I also don't understand what the point is in taking the "Christ" part out of "Christianity." Do you have a problem with Yesha ben-Yosef himself, or just with him being given the title of "anointed one" and "mashiach?"

Best wishes for this brave initiative. European-americans have much to learn from you about caring for all life on earth.

I hope your enterprise will not be perverted by white negatives, but will adopt their positives like using science and technology for building a sustainable society where overpopulation need not be controlled by war and infanticide, but with modern birth control methods. Let your warriors fight in sports arenas, not in wars.

Secession won't Succeed, totally (of course), but the efforts and drawn-focus upon the many canards/excesses of our own 'purported-Culture' and definitions of Intents/Sovereignty/Rights may just result in a successful-outgrowth -- and be as positive for ourselves as it may be for our older-Brothers. [One can only Hope (hear that, Kem?) and Struggle?]
When the general population can develop some 'sense' of our true-History (and how same-Imperatives shape our current-Policies) -- then Consent and acquiescence may finally be withdrawn [all Power/Wealth are of the People -- anywhere]. For majorities to 'change their comfortable-courses', they must first be convinced that doing-so is also in THEIR-interests and that all real-Interests are Shared -- Change must follow-that, not Ideology-alone.
Again, the Legal Arguments should be telling/fascinating and informative. If our own Constitution was enacted pursuant to fraud/illegal-gain (making all-since 'fruit of poisoned-tree'), and/or if today we are and act as a criminal-State, then who shall Title/claim anything, or any-land? These and related are 'core issues' and Rights, and we in the US are FAR overdue for some critical-introspection -- up-and-down the 'chain of command'.

We will sit, until the methane gas in the thawing Arctic perma-frost is released into our atmosphere. __ Then we wil lie down and curl up into a fetal position.

We have from five to ten years.

"I see this movement as RIGHT in principle; no doubt about it. But I also see it as potentially very dangerous if it gets anywhere near succeeding, or at all perceived as threatening to the imperialist, … ruling elites of the US govt. They are NOT merciful people; nor are their instrumental soldiers and police forces.

We would then also likely have violently racist colonist Americans providing "assistance" to these above forces of the ruling elites' control.

I don't know, but it seems potentially very dangerous to me."

Yes, to me too. However, we've allowed things to get explosively dangerous through acquiescence and sheepishness. Perhaps this is start of the time of action and the time to choose sides.

Life on this earth is becoming imperiled. Can we passively sit by much longer?

Treefrog wrote:
"As long as one person remembers the world will exist"

Yes I know. Smiles.....

quousque wrote:

"Curious that it is usually quite easy for most Americans to recognize "Tribalism" as a deadend form of societal organization contrary to progressive, inclusive democracies everywhere on earth, but when manifested here it somehow becomes praiseworthy ……… unless those Tribes are close enough to matter much in their lives."

Quousque, you have made anti-Indian statements repeatedly on this thread. Anti-Indian rhetoric is organized today and found in many anti-Indian organizations such as One Nation. Your above statement is pure hubris. Indian Peoples are agressively conftonted today by these organized errant rhetorical efforts everywhere that there is discussion of important political Indian affairs. For a further look at this issue please read this article written from the Indian perspective by a respected Indian Scholar.
http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096414433

History demonstrated that democracy cannot scale. As power pyramids of any sort scale in size (height and width of base), the relationship between leader and follower becomes increasingly abstract, too easily co-opted, cannot be forcibly checked if necessary. Over the centuries it has ultimately produced leadership who are tyrannical or antithetical to the interests of their own people.

The Hutterites are an interesting form of neo-tribalism. Small-scale communal societies, they do no reject technology, and they practice highly productive farming. When population becomes too large, most of these colonial societies have mechanisms to splinter, and form a new colony. They scale power in parallel. This worked for tens of thousands of years whereas America is attempting to scale it upward. No modern empire in the past couple centuries has lasted particularly long. They die of their own lack of sustainability.

Keep in mind that there are models arguably better than democracy. The Green Ten Key Values aim toward it: consensus-style decision making and only small jurisdictions -- as opposed to dictatorship by the majority, lowest common-denominator or the wealthy (endpoints where so-called democracy has taken us).

Curious that it is usually quite easy for most Americans to recognize "Tribalism" as a deadend form of societal organization contrary to progressive, inclusive democracies everywhere on earth, but when manifested here it somehow becomes praiseworthy ......... unless those Tribes are close enough to matter much in their lives.

"Any ideas about melding the spiritual portion of the Iroquois Confederacy (a totally unprecedented document, long given little or no respect in 'white-man's history'), that aid our search for a new and better Constitution?"

I am interested in the Historical-import and Legal-nature of many related-topics, but you propose 'philosophy'.
In speaking of the indigenous the Colonies came to destroy (when perhaps all-sensible should have 'joined-them'), there were many and varied cultures/tribes, and the lack of literacy hides much detail, today. However, and speaking 'in general', their overall lifestyle and 'ways' were as close to a 'sustainable-civilization' fully suited to their Environment as one can imagine -- if America was as-a-name meant to invoke 'heaven', then that's pretty-much what Whites found/destroyed when and after they arrived. That is not to say that much/most practiced in that lost-Paradise is applicable to we in our far-different 'Western Civilization'. "Were that was so", frankly, but only 'some' borrowing would make-sense today (our Constitution, if 'disabused', such a needful-thing).
My overall intent in speaking to these 'histories' is to, essentially, wake others up to the Reality that what we are ALL finding 'so appalling' today about 'greedy Interests', and savage neo-Policies, and Colonialist Hubris, is NOT 'new' or solely the mistakes/intents of just our modern-Era. All that has so offended and chagrined those with ethics/morality these past many-decades (and more-so of late) is just 'more of the same' for the US -- 'innocence' was never involved from the very-beginnings, and nascent corporate/banking-Interests were consistent-throughout (with minor setbacks, as might be predictable/allowed-for).
We were EVER the embodiment of greed-and-conquest -- firstly on this-Continent, and lately and progressively more 'far-flung' in scope. History well proves-this, and consistently, from the 1600's right up to yesterday's-news.
Not that American's are 'unique' in anything other than 'opportunity' to "succeed at the expense of others" -- all humans are simply prey to their shared-Natures, as precariously balanced-against by their cultural/local-Mythos (which, in the case of these Natives, was remarkably 'civilized' compared to Colonists-and-since).
I'll leave all the Manitou/Aquarian/faith-based nonsense to others for 'weighing' as 'causal' -- I am secular, ethical, and personally unwilling to profit if such is based on other's larger-losses. I believe that, in all-things, 'there is enough for all' -- and I counter my Lifeform-needs for Success with my Mythos-needs for an egalitarian/communal-understanding, tolerances, and favored mutual-Interests. [If more were to think similarly, the world would perhaps host no Utopia directly, but it would be a lot-more Just and peaceful, methinks!]
So much for Philosophy...I want to focus more on 'survival', lately. The 'Enemy' must be properly identified and 'known' to ever be countered...and the enemy is US.

"Your assertion that Catholics did not participate in the displacement of the Lakota People is not supported by the preponderance of history. You are suggesting that only Protestants participated in the Black Hills Gold Rush and that is preposterous on it's face."

My assertion was only meant to counter the notion that a RCC-Bull, of itself, was a prime-Impetus in present-case (as it surely was-not-- in most of the US, which is not to 'absolve-Catholics, per se). Did it 'set a tone' ill-fating the indigenous...yes, it among many-factors -- but not 'directly-Causal', and WHOLLY secondary to "greedy protestant/secular white men" of the Founders-ilk, who cabbaged-on to GW's promoted-scheme/intent to fraudulently and/or forcefully deprive all Amer-Inds of their lands ever-Westward. That is precisely why the RP of 1763 'caused' the Revolution that followed (and also enabled the genocide which we all are speaking of as deplorable and patently-illegal).
The I.C. that Franklin 'borrowed' was NOT written in that Era...I've no way to authenticate modern/written versions (not do involved-Elders). But much first-person evidence among Colonialists support the contention of 'plagiarism' regards Constitutional 'main-points' and essence.
Clear, now?
Anyone who is literate (accountants, even!) can find/assess the relevant History involved-here...'historians' as-such are probably the most-influenced and suspect of History-providers (I always check multiple-sources independently before relying on much-anything, as did the accountant-author of those Links [his other-nonsense 'less meaningful'] -- which I hold to be valuable 'introductory material' to anyone wishing to counter/'cure' the Official-nonsense we are inundated-with in this country).

With all of the gov't propaganda, who knows what the future hold.

I was just LOL about the Vandals and Rome (I'm sure they were once triumphant and proud people). What would they say if they knew that their tribal name outlasted so many of their enemies', but then they realize it's only known as an outlet for teenage pranks vandalizing the establishment.

I'm sure they had taggers back then, even saw that the Roman Coliseum had exactly the same style advertising used today around the edges of the stadium seating.

What will the future sentient life forms think of USAns, in our epic battles against THEYans? Will the wise POGOeans be praised or denounced for being so seldom sought for council?

Kem,

The first approach was warfare/extermination. Then it was a different sort of ethnic cleansing: forcing them to boarding schools, forbidding them to practice the Ghost Dance and most every other practice, etc. It was a policy of complete fascism: assimilate or else.

Sadly, this was history repeating itself. Ancient Rome, and the European royalty tyrants forced the tribal/indigenous Europeans off their own religions which had worked since time immemorial. In more recent time, they've discriminated against the last remaining "Indians" of Europe (for instance, Gaelic speakers).

There's only one way bound for the long-term: live and let live. There is the politics of tyranny. And the politics of independence, self-determination, assertion.

I remember that Teutoberg Forest presaged the rise of Marius, a permanent standing army drawn from the populus censi and finally the fall of the Republic and rise of the Imperial period.

My family is Visigoth way back to Spain. The original name was Walther.

The Lakota have my support and best wishes.
I hope that they will not be the only ones in the vanguard standing up and saying we must do things differently.

You are right there Treefrog, I saw on the news today that Mexico just raised their minimum wage to $4.80 a DAY. No wonder they want to come here. I never knew that was the score there. We should annex them. __ NO, wait, ___ we might end up with their minimum wage.

Oh Lord help us all, ___ we need it.

Hi Kem

Just kidding with you a little

Doom and Gloom

As long as one person remembers the world will exist

The Lakota people have my complete support.

The same horse shit the Europeans delivered to them was delivered by Rome and our own autocrats back in Europe. They forced us to assimilate, abandon our tribal identity/language/religion, our connection to the earth spirit. We were forced to accept a foreign religion.

I am greatly encouraged that the Lakota people may draw the line again. One of the first times it was drawn was in the village of my surname, by the Cherusci tribe in Germany against Rome: the Battle of the Teutoberg Forest. The tribal people weren't interested in Empire. There are points in history in which self-determination asserts itself.

HI TREEFROG, I understand Crazy Horse was not only an exceptionally intelligent leader, he was also a very brave man.

That may be so, THEREALHELLKITTY. Nothing our government does anymore amazes me.

We should stop the train, re-write the rules and start over.

Mike Corbeil wrote:

"You might be more expert on the bureaucratic, etc., aspects of the RCC than I am, but you definitely and clearly are far behind knowing what the true faith is really about; and the latter is what's crucial. It's not to say that the crimes of the churches are not important; it's to say that the churches can be abandoned and allowed to come to fully cease to exist, without this having any bearing at all on whether or not people can be true to Christian faith as Jesus taught it."

Mike I believe I understand what you are saying and I'm not unsympathetic to your beliefs. I too know many Jesus followers who are to a person good people. I know many Catholics and Protestants in organized churches that are good people too. I would just hope for a couple of things: One, that Christian People recognize the great harm their religions have done and find it in their hearts to recognize it openly, and Two, to stop attempting to convert Indigenous Peoples to Christianity in what ever form it exists. In my opinion, especially in America, attempts to convert Traditional American Indian People to Christianity is a form of Cultural Genocide. I would estimate that fewer than a quarter million Traditional American Indians remain and any effort to convert them endangers our Cultural existence. I fear however that because of the Dominionist beliefs of Christians that this will not happen. Christians will likely insist on Cultural Genocide.

KemPatrick, I understand that the border is the next assignment for the Blackwater group.

If we suffer a depression, the Mexicans won't allow any of us to enter. If they did we wouldn't last a day. For one thing, our money would be totally worthless.

Probably the only viable solution is to declare war on them. They do have a lot of oil. Maybe we should not ask to pull our troops out of Iraq,___ some idiots may do that.

Also, The Iroquoise were a confederacy of several nations and they accepted other tribes that otherwise would not have survived into that confederacy.

Mi casa es su casa lol

Kem, I think that the initial idea is a good one, vis a vis backing a viable candidate who would be good for Mexico. The problem they have is much the same as ours, a ruling elite backed by "state owned" assets such as Pemex. They also don't have a very long history of Democratic ideals and traditions, if you will, entrenched in their society. It is still very much family-centered and "tribal" in that sense. I do know that large numbers of Americans are purchasing homes and land there especially in the San Miguel d'Allende area. I just wonder, if the US government runs off the rails how welcome WE would be south of the border?

Kem

Yep, I think it was merit. Crazy Horse was first a medicine man and later a long shirt.

Of course we could also agree to be be annexed by Mexico and we'd all be Mexicans. Either way is Okay by me, as long as the fighting over who is crossing the borders is settled. And let's leave Canada alone, it's too cold up there to fight over it.

I think Mexican people prefer thier culture to ours. They come here for money not culture.

I believe War Chiefs were determined by how friggin tough they were.

Another thing we should ponder, is to attempt to end the bull shit with Mexico.

We should back a decent Mexican political candidate, a statesman or woman, for their presidency. One who would support having Mexico annexed by the United States and for eventual statehood. No more northern Mexican border, 'everyone' is an American. The southern border would be Panama.

Think of the problems that could eleminate. ___ It may create a few, but weigh the options. We must always take the bad with the good.

A couple of things here. A state and a reservation are not the same thing. The federal government manages money for reservations (it is NA money and not federal tax dollars) It has mismanaged billions of dollars and will not be accountable for it. Gail Norton was in contempt of federal court because she would not present any records relating to NA money. Imagine having the state department and particularly the Bush administration managing your home and your bank account. I know indirectly they do, but in this case thier name is one the blank check.

I think that if you want to make the finest point of what to call "native Americans" they should be called the "Pre-Conquest Peoples". It recognizes their status as some of the earliest inhabitants yet doesn't necessarily rank them by who took whom's land and who crossed the ice bridge first.
Are there any Clovis people still here, or did they evolve into other Amerindian tribes as they populated the continent?

As to the depopulation of large swathes of the continent, that was largely attributable to European disease brought in the 1500s and earlier and given time to work.

I've read every post here and this is amazing. I do believe we have the new nation in the making and it is all of us. It is in our hands now. Sleep well tonight and may your dreams show you the passage.

Personally I woud like to see all of the Indian reservations abolished. Give every American Indian who needs it, a free education, thru college of their choice, with all expenses paid and a fair salary until they have gained employment after graduation.

Every Indian who now resides on a reservation should have the land deed for their acerage and a decent home built and paid for at government expense. They should be placed near the top of government job hiring lists.

Those unable to be schooled due to age, or any other valid reason, should be given a fair wage and decent housing and job opportunites if able to work. What our government, or, 'we the people' have done to the Indians is criminal and we should now pay up.

Doing that will eleminate the divisions amongst us, They are divided from the whites because we forced them to be. Indians should be Americans, no different than anyone else who lives in America. They can maintain their ancient cultures and they should do so. After all, they were the ONLY Americans before Columbus arrived.

In the Iroquoise tradition there is a grandmother lodge that is part of determining how a Chief(president) is elected. The American government is similar except they left out the grandmother lodge. The grandmother lodge would be similar to the electoral college. The grandmother lodge had to approve candidates and they also could remove a chief that didnot provide in the best interests of his people. I believe war chiefs were determined differently.

I disagree with some comments. Lincoln may have had his faults, as all of humanity does, but he saved the Union. __ Strength in union, Divided we fall. I don't ever wish to see the day when I have to 'show papers' to cross from one state to another. Our commercial drivers already have to do that and it's just another method of taking money, so some over educated idiots, can have a soft government office job writing rules and regulations.

Now, the American Indians have some rightful bitches, they signed treaties penned by our government in good faith and our goverment and the white settlers of that time in our history 'unfaithed' those documents. If our government wished to just take all of the land, they should not have offered any treaties in the first place.

It will be interesting to see if these first victims of Corporatist American Government light the proverbial fire cracker that motivates various States to secede from this "Outlaw Nation", as some states have already suggested they would like to do.

"A Russian should rejoice if Poland, the Baltic Provinces, Finland, Armenia, should be separated, freed from Russia; so with an Englishman in regard to Ireland, India and other possessions; and each should help to do this, because the greater the state, the more wrong and cruel its patriotism, and the greater is the sum of suffering upon which its power is founded. Therefore, if we really wish to be what we profess to be, we must not only cease our present desire for the growth of the state, but we must desire its decrease, its weakening, and help this forward with all our might." ~ Count Leo Tolstoy

God bless their efforts with success.

David Fund,

But you already did rush to a conclusion, pronouncing the story as "a hoax." Perhaps I was too suspicious of you. I am always suspicious of posters who decry a significant story as "a Hoax" and dogmatically state that it is an embarrassment to the Common Dreams site. You can see, can't you? Why we are leery of you when you state "hoax" as a fact, rather than an opinion and then give no reference to support your disbelief.

Of course the corporate, mining owned Associated press is going to ignore all protests in washington dc as well as indian claims of sovereignty concerning lands long in dispute.

What did you really expect from the Main Stream Media?

An Indian endorsement of revolt? They ignored the story as they ignored environmental catastrophe for thirty years.

Your point that we may be over-heartened by a bitch slap in the face of this oppressive government is valid. You may turn out to be correct, however, the RC Journal lives in that neck of the woods and should verify their sources before running a big story like this. Omission of coverage by the Associated Press means nothing (actually, it gives it more validity in my view.) Until I see a retraction or refuting evidence I will assume the local account is correct notwithstanding expected internal indian dissension on what to do within the tribe. (the tribe is many magnitudes more a democracy than our gov't is. I used to work for the tribes in the Southwest and can tell you that infighting is constant: it's a healthy sign of democracy.)

Regardless of authority to do so, as you understand it,
it is undisputed that Mean's is a major player in reservation politics.

Me ALSO TOO -- Thank you for the details, I knew this issue would be relevant to our 2nd go around of the creation of democracy, as PACPLYER had pointed out last week that we all might consider reading the portions of history of those turbulent times (repeated now), as powerful lessons for what comes.

This is also why I introduced the context to discuss putting (somehow) the SPIRIT back into the CONSTITUTION, w/o killing quicker with the fundies.

Any ideas about melding the spiritual portion of the Iroquois Confederacy (a totally unprecedented document, long given little or no respect in 'white-man's history'), that aid our search for a new and better Constitution?

COYOTITA - You are correct that "it is providential that the Indians once more show us the way . . ."

My hope is that we might frame our ("hidden") revolution as a new Constitutional Congress, and of course including the Indian's wisdom even more so this time around, and with celebratory enthusiasm (to avoid the death skull at the party, if war becomes necessary).

Mealsotoo wrote:
"However, the 'colonists' who pressed-West illegally and destroyed the Lakotian-culture (and many-more) were almost-entirely Protestant or secular — Catholics a tiny&powerless-minority in pre/post-Colonial era (and even Today!).That Bull in no-fashion EVER impacted on Plains/Lakota-victims [only varied CA and near-by tribes).
Why don't the two-of-you peruse them before commenting at such-lengths (just a friendly-suggestion — so your voices can be supportive of those actually 'informed' and trying to "do something" about spreading-the-Truth, sad as it is)"

True the Protestants too were involved in the American Genocide. "Joseph Story had an illustrious career as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1811 - 1845, a span of 34 years. In 1829, he became Dane Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, which provided him time to write. He was also a close friend of Chief Justice John Marshall from 1810 until Marshall's death in 1835.

In early 1833, Story published his ''Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States.'' This three-volume work received high praise. A few months later, he published a one-volume ''Abridgement'' of the ''Commentaries.''

From a Native perspective, ''Commentaries'' is an important work because it sheds considerable light on the ideas used early in the history of the United States to rationalize the treatment of American Indian nations and Indian land rights.

The first chapter of ''Commentaries'' is titled ''Origin and Title to the Territory of the Colonies.'' It begins with a mention of Columbus' historic voyage and quickly moves to England's bid for territorial expansion under the leadership of King Henry VII, and the charter granted by Henry to John Cabot ''to subdue and take possession of any lands unoccupied by any Christian power, in the name of and for the benefit of the crown"
http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096414335

Your assertion that Catholics did not participate in the displacement of the Lakota People is not supported by the preponderance of history. You are suggesting that only Protestants participated in the Black Hills Gold Rush and that is preposterous on it's face. I suppose no Catholics were involved in illegally running the railroad through the Black Hills as well, and that the Cavalry was only populated by Protestants. The links you provided were written by an accountant and he warned readers to take that into consideration.

Your comments relative to my remarks seem trollish.

No disrespect to our simian friends is ever intended when I call that idiot in the white house chimpy.
In fact, I am sure that when compared to the simian population, the chimp would wind up at the bottom of the curve. Please note the similarities between Cheetah when Tarzan would come home and the typical Yale cheerleader, or drunk for that matter.
On the other hand, I just lost the best dog that I ever owned, a Siberian named Lakota. I believe that her spirit has arisen with this endeavor to right the 150 year wrong. God Speed Lakota!

MeAlsoToo December 22nd, 2007 7:58 pm:

Those Iroquois documents do exist in print, and if memory serves, the copy I read was put out by the Tribe itself. Read our Declaration of Independence where it mentions Indian warfare, which was put there in reference to them. The Iroquois et al were in a constant state of warfare with the southern Tribes, notably the Cherokee, and the Ohio Valley was relatively emptied due to that. BTW, I am indeed somewhat of scholar regarding Indian Law, and find it tedious dealing with those who lack much understanding of that field.

lillulu December 22nd, 2007 8:02 pm:

The Sioux were originally from the Great Lakes area, and were pushed west by other tribes responding to the Iroquois incursions, sort of like dominos falling. Of course, the Sioux displaced those Indians who had been living where they are now too. Think about those Cliff Dwelling Indians situation sometime if you think it was all copacetic amongst Native Americans before Europeans got here.

Carl Jung once wrote that "God speaks through mythology."

There's a Muskogee (Creek) myth about how the Muskogee would be almost exterminated, but then would return to the Earth just before the End of Times.

"seraphicmom wrote: "… there is no such thing as an 'american indian'. The correct title is 'native american'"
I rather like the moniker given them here in Canada: "First Nations."

I don't like any-of-those (since they weren't the first-'anything' and/or none are 'accurate'). There were indigenous-peoples here for approximately 25,000-years before the second-Peoples crossed over the land-bridge around 8,000 BC -- and apparently slew, absorbed or otherwise made-extinct those that they found-here. [I'd like to imagine that they just 'absorbed' the original-populations, but due to a general-lack of written-History we may never-know how "that went down" -- not that it matters-much now]

quousque, skirmishes between tribes for hunting grounds wasn't the reason they were depopulated. There were plenty of indigenous people here before the imperialists crossed the Atlantic.

"Maybe this silliness will help expose the goofy status "Indian Tribes" enjoy under US Law.
"Reply to MeAlsoToo December 22nd, 2007 7:11 pm:
I have read those Iroquois documents, and there is almost no similarity between them and our Constitution. Thom Hartmann frequently goes into a rant praising it and alleging something akin to what you wrote, but the truth is we owe nothing at all to it, the Iroquois were an ally of the British against the Colonies who were being courted by Franklin et al, and also they were extremely warlike with other Indian Tribes. Did you know that a major reason White settlement proceeded so easily into the Ohio Valley was because Indian vs Indian warfare had largely depopulated the region?"

Another 'scholar', huh?
You've never read an Iroquois-document -- precisely because they never wrote-any (theirs was an Oral-tradition). If you 'read' almost anything-else REGARDS the Confederacy-in-question, you wouldn't have written the-above. The 'Indians' you speak-of (also, incorrectly) fought WITH the British against the French (the Crown promising-much -- AND actually 'delivering' -- for their crucial-help), long before the Colonists were ticked-off by being told "not to murder more beyond the Appalachians" by their-King. [Of course they fought with the British against rebelling-Colonialists -- mores-the-pity they didn't fight-harder] They weren't 'ignorant', any more than pre-1946 Palestinians were Ignorant -- 'Indians' knew what was in store for them if the Framers 'had their way'.
I also know that before the advent of the Whites that Indian-warfare seldom produced many 'casualties' -- fighting was limited, and largely a matter of 'honor' (nor was 'scalping' an "Injun-habit"). Nor did they fight-wars with 'diseased-blankets' or phony-'charity' (such 'WMD being a White-thang', also).
In the 'Ohio Valley', everything humanly-possible was brought-to-bear by Whites to 'achieve' Indian-against-Indian violence (just like black-on-black violence in modern-Era). [How could you not know-that?]
I seem to 'know a whole-lot' you don't seem-to (or are you just another CD-'troll')?

seraphicmom wrote: "... there is no such thing as an 'american indian'. The correct title is 'native american'"

I rather like the moniker given them here in Canada: "First Nations." It has a ring of autonomy and authority to it that "native american" lacks. It hold explicit recognition that native nationhood existed first, and the implicit acknowledgment that we interlopers are here only by agreements that we must uphold.

It will be very interesting to watch the response. I predict Ghandi's observation will hold true: "First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." Good luck, Russell Means and the Lakota!